Return to Transcripts main page

QUEST MEANS BUSINESS

Medical Examiner to Examine Prince's Body and Medical History; U.K. at "Back of Queue" Outside EU; Volkswagen Announces Massive Loss; Emissions Authorities Investigate Daimler, Peugeot; Fans Pay Tribute to Prince; Artist Turner Replaces Adam Smith on GBP 20 Note

Aired April 22, 2016 - 16:30:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


(SIMULCAST OF MINNESOTA AUTHORITIES PRESS CONFERENCE ON PRINCE DEATH)

PAULA NEWTON, CNN ANCHOR: Everyone, I'm Paula Newton here in New York. You have been listening in with me to Sheriff Jim Olson of Carver County.

I'll give you headlines here. He basically announced no obvious signs of trauma. And that there was no reason to believe that this was a suicide.

Now, other than that, we know that three staff members have been looking for Prince. They had last seen him 8:00 p.m. the night before. Got

worried and made a medical call at 9:43. We then heard from Martha Weaver who's with the Midwest Medical Examiner's Office and that is really what is

key here right now. It is that all-important autopsy.

They would not release any information except to say that tissue samples were taken. That, of course, an autopsy was done. There are tissue

samples taken. A toxicology exam under way and that it would be days or even weeks before they could release more information. The body, Prince's

body, has now been released to his family. CNN law enforcement analyst Tom Fuentes now live from Washington. Tom, they certainly went out of the way

to make it seem, look, this is what we would do in an investigation even if it's Prince. Anything stand out to you in terms of how they're handling

the investigation?

TOM FUENTES, CNN SENIOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: No, I think, Paula, it was professionally handled as far as conveying to the media and to the

world what they're doing and how it's being conducted. I have witnessed many autopsies over the years and I know that it's going to take a while to

get all the full results. But in a case like this where if someone doesn't die from terminal illness where they're lingering in a hospital and then

finally pass, but die under unusual circumstances, then they conduct a full death investigation. And that means that in the beginning of the case they

don't rule out homicide, suicide, accident or illness. Now, what they're saying in this press conference is that there was no obvious signs of

trauma or violence to the body. He didn't appear to be shot, stabbed, other blunt trauma, beaten. This type of thing. Didn't appear he fell and

hit his head on a corner or piece of furniture, fell down the stairs. This type of injury. On the outside of the body.

But now, they do the toxicology. They examine the blood, other body fluids, take tissue samples from all of the organs and the brain. And they

will be looking for whether there's drugs in the system, whether there's parasites that he may have picked up from traveling around the world and

doing concerts. He could have picked up something that ultimately became fatal. Could be poisoned. He could be just from the flu. Or the effect

of that on his body. So there's any number of possibilities and it will take weeks, probably two or three weeks to get the results from all of

those tests. I don't think the medical examiner will be in a hurry to put out partial statements other than today that there was no obvious signs,

but after that I think they'll wait for all of the blood and toxicology, other exams, to be completed before they come back.

NEWTON: Certainly to die so young and mysterious circumstances, like you said, Tom, they want to make sure they do it right, and certainly they said

that themselves in the press conference. Tom, thanks so much for standing by with us as we listened in there. Appreciate it.

FUENTES: You're welcome, Paula.

[16:35:00] [17:00:00] NEWTON: Now moving on to the other news of the day here, U.S. President Obama has poured water over the idea that Britain

could quickly strike a trade deal with the United States if it left the E.U. British politicians campaigning for a so-called Brexit have said the

UK could reach a bilateral deal with the United States if Britain's voted to leave the European Union in June. Mr. Obama says Britain would have to

go to the back of the line.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, U.S. PRESIDENT: I think it's fair to say that maybe some point down the line there might be a U.K./U.S. trade agreement but it's not

going to happen any time soon, because our focus is in negotiating with a big bloc, the European Union, to get a trade agreement done. And U.K.'s

going to be in the back of the queue.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

NEWTON: Now, a former British Defense Coordinator, Liam Fox, wrote an open letter ahead of Mr. Obama's visit, urging him not to weigh in on the Brexit

debate. And Fox said it has been a long-established practice for allies not to interfere in each other's domestic politics. He joins me now live

from Bristol, England. You know, I have a heard of lot of analogies today. I'm going to make one myself. One would say, look, we're friends. If I

think my friend is about to jump over the cliff, I'm going to grab her by the collar and make sure she doesn't do it. That's what he was doing.

That's kind of what he says he was doing. Why the objections?

LIAM FOX, FORMER BRITISH DEFENSE SECRETARY: Well, first of all, there's an element of double standards here because there's no way that the United

States would tolerate an unelected body able to overrule the Supreme Court. There's no way they would accept an open border with Mexico being imposed

upon them, no way to accept Congress being told how to spend its money from outside. Yet, we have all of those things in the European Union and unable

to make our trade agreements and many of us think that in a self-governing democracy we have to take those powers back into the sovereign state

itself. And it seems a bit strange for me that President Obama is urging on the United Kingdom things that is he would never dare urge on the United

States electoral or Democratic systems.

NEWTON: Well, but in fact, the United States does adhere to any rulings that are done under the NAFTA treaty and many rules, they have been found

fault in many of them to pay fines and change the ways. But that notwithstanding, that's about the merits of the case of Brexit. I'm asking

you why did you send the letter in fact, to the U.S. ambassador saying, look, butt out. We don't want the U.S. president involved here.

FOX: Well, I think if there were cases such as an existential threat such as America's national security, it would be for the president to speak out,

and of course he does have a right to speak out. But I think that it risks souring relations to an extent unnecessarily. Because the president talks

about what will happen in terms of trade agreements. But of course he didn't mention that he won't be there to oversee them and won't in fact be

his business. It's a touch presumptuous to say that and it hasn't gone down particularly well in some sections of this country, and amongst

certain sections of our politicians on the electorate. So I think to introduce that note was unnecessary. When this was his final visit to the

country as president, and he really was talking about a period where he will have no jurisdiction or influence whatsoever.

NEWTON: Are you afraid, though, that in fact he will have an impact on the campaign, and that's why a lot on the Brexit, on the leave campaign, right

now want to discredit the comments, because you're afraid they'll have an effect? Do you think they will have an effect?

FOX: Well, if the reaction today is anything to go by might have a negative effect. And I've always thought that there would be very little

actual impact on the campaign. But that both sides to an extent might have a political reaction to it. And given that the United States, our most

important partner, is our closest friend in the world, why would we want to introduce that note of bitterness or sourness in to that unnecessarily?

This is a decision for the British people. Of course, in the end, the president is entitled to have his opinion. But I think that when, as I've

said, when the U.S. has a court in Toronto telling the Supreme Court what to do and open border with Mexico imposed and congress being told how to

spend the money maybe we'll not just hear but listen.

NEWTON: Mr. Fox, we'll continue to watch the debate, obviously, from this side of the pond and appreciate your comments this evening.

Now, Ian Bremmer is President of the Eurasia Group, which looks at political and business risks. He joins me now live here in the studio.

Look, I'm not going to tell you about political risk. We know you are the expert of political risk.

IAN BREMMER, PRESIDENT EURASIA GROUP: Good start.

NEWTON: Was there not risky? Because if you take Mr. Fox's point of view here, why bother? He could have made that comment, look, you're going to

get at the back of the line in our trade negotiations and leave it at that. Other than that, vote how he'd like.

BREMMER: He said queue, which shows of course the remarkable cultural fluency that Mr. Obama so well-known for. But leaving that aside, no, of

course, if it's an important alliance and if Britain's most important ally truly believes that this is going to have a significant cost on the

U.S./British bilateral relationship, then it would be quite irresponsible for the American president not to say anything.

[16:40:00] Leave aside the fact that Prime Minister Cameron requested President Obama to come in and actually weigh in on his political side of

the issue. So it really would have been a slap in the face to the Brits and to an ally if Obama had said nothing. I do agree --

NEWTON: Do you know there's -- historical precedence against that. Let's listen to Mr. Obama right now justifying why he's decided to weigh in.

BREMMER: Sure.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: They say, for example, that, "Well, we'll just cut our own trade deals with the United States." So they're voicing an opinion about what

the United States is going to do. I figured you might want to hear it from the President of the United States what I think the United States is going

to do.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

NEWTON: Mr. Bremmer, he could have said that without butting in. Now, look. I have covered a lot of independence movements in Canada and

throughout the world. I don't like covering them or the fallout. It gets ugly. A lot of people when they're visiting those states do not say

anything. They say it's a democratic process, I will stay out of it.

BREMMER: The British/U.S. relationship isn't very special anymore and when the Americans told Brits that they didn't want them to join the China led

Asian infrastructure investment bank, the Brits didn't only join, they joined first. And they said we want to be China's best friend in the

developed world.

I think that what we see is that most important relationship that the U.S. and the Brits have had for the last 75 years is actually eroding. It's

unraveling in front of our eyes and trade piece is a big piece of that. It's going to get a lot weaker with Brexit. The Americans find Britain

less compelling if they leave the EU. The U.S. will spend a lot more time with Germany, which will be much more important.

I tell you the thing that's quite sad, in all of this, which is that at no point in Britain is anyone discussing the fact that the Europeans actually

need the U.K. in Europe. They need U.K. leadership. They need them as part of the common market. That's not relevant. This is only about what

Britain needs. And you can say, "Well, hey, of course, it's their national interest." But Britain used to be greater than that. Britain used to be

more significant. They've jettisoned it. They're saying, "You know what, it doesn't matter. We're truly embracing the fact of a second rate power."

And I think that's sad in a world needing leadership. That's just absent from the most important vote that they're going to be taking in the

lifetimes of the people that are actually making those votes.

NEWTON: Some would say that we are actually -- none of us entitled to use opinions, Britain's just have to vote. Unfortunately, I have to leave it

there. I'll end with appreciating your touch of purple today. It looks very good.

BREMMER: My pleasure.

NEWTON: Appreciate it. Hope to hear you again on this debate.

Daimler is just one of the companies being is put under the spotlight for possible emissions cheating this week. I'll discuss the growing scandal

with the head of the International Council on Clean Transportation.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:45:00] NEWTON: Volkswagen has announced a massive loss of more $6 billion. The automaker is still reeling from the huge emissions cheating

scandal of last year. Now the company initially set aside about $7.5 billion to cope with the crisis. Now Volkswagen said it will set aside

more than double that, just over 18 billion.

More of the biggest names in the auto industry are being dragged into these fuel scandals it seemed by the day and by the week. Volkswagen has reached

a deal on half a million of the cars affected. U.S. owners can have those brought back and fixed or get a substantial lump sum payment. Daimler

shares are though down, as well. About 5% after admitting its investigating, "Possible indications of irregularities in U.S. emissions."

The automaker whose brands include Mercedes Benz is cooperating fully with authorities.

Mitsubishi shares have tumbled again today. It's now lost nearly half of the share price in just three days after cheating on fuel economy tests.

Peugeot offices were raided on Thursday as part of an emissions investigation. The company responded saying its vehicles are compliant in

every country it operates. Peugeot's share price took a tumble too, down nearly 2 percent following news of the anti-fraud investigation. And

earlier this year the same regulators raided French rivals offices.

Now, joining me is the head of the International Council on Clean Transportation. Thank you so much for joining us. In terms -- yes, of

course, Drew. In terms of what's going on here, what is happening? We seem to have continually new things every week and every day. It's almost

as if we have a missing link here that this could have been going on for much longer than we know.

DREW KODJAK, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ICCT: I think that's right. I think we're finding out that compliance with emissions standards by manufacturers

across multiple markets has been weak for many years. And the Volkswagen scandal uncovered it first in the United States that rippled across the

world. And now seeing the Japanese market affected and Mitsubishi and Nissan issue, and now Germany, U.K., France, releasing reports showing

emissions are very, very high. It's quite a global issue.

NEWTON: It's a global issue. You know, today here in New York we had COP- 21, the Paris agreement on the environment signed. You have a long and labored history at the EPA. You know all about this at time when no one

was speaking this really. When you look at the emissions standards, are they having a really hard time meeting them or just too ambitious and so

they feel as if they have to cheat?

KODJAK: Wow. Great question. So one point being that if the world is going to have any hope of complying with the Big Climate Treaty, we're

going to have to have standards that are effective in the real world. And so if we can't do it in vehicles, we're not going to be able to do it

anywhere else. We have to do that, right. Many manufacturers are capable of meeting the standards. The standards that are most challenging are for

light duty diesel vehicles. That's what Volkswagen case was about and that's what most of the testing going on in Europe. There is some also

additional challenges with the CO2 standards. I think overall there is a trend that regulations are getting tighter. They're more expensive to meet

so there's a greater incentive for manufacturers to take liberties with the test. Maybe cheat, maybe not. Exploit loopholes. Behooves governments to

do a better job in working on compliance now that they had before.

NEWTON: OK, regulation costs government money, it costs these companies money. Again, it's going to come out somebody's pocket. Do you think it's

time to get rid of the self-testing? These companies testing themselves.

KODJAK: So great question. The way the United States does it, actually allows companies to self-test, self-certify and an audit procedure all

throughout the process from new vehicles --

NEWTON: But yet we have all of this happening and somehow the audit process didn't catch it. Right?

KODJAK: Excellent question. So the U.S. and California have improved their system now. So their testing not only on their laboratory tests, but

also under real world operating conditions. So hopefully that won't happen again. But that was a flaw, or shortcoming in the system that has now been

solved in the United States. Needs to be solved in the rest of the world as well.

NEWTON: OK. Well for everybody whose losing all that money in their driveways right now. Mr. Kodjak, thank you so much. I know you'll

continue to work on the issues and it's something that obviously we going to continue to following there. Appreciate you coming in.

KODJAK: Thank you so much.

NEWTON: Next, a closer look at not only Prince the performer, but Prince the songwriter and businessman.

[16:50:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

NEWTON: Dance parties have been held across the United States and the world, really, to try to pay tribute to this music legend, including

gathering in Brooklyn Thursday night. It was one hosted by Spike Lee. Cannot stop dancing around here. Everyone from fellow musicians to world

leaders continue to express their love and respect for Prince.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEVIE WONDER, MUSICIAN: The heart break is to see this man who's so talented be taken away from us. But I know that the Almighty God has far

greater things for him to do.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: It's remarkable loss and I'm staying at Winfield House, the U.S. ambassador's residence. It so happens our ambassador has a turntable and

so this morning we played "Purple Rain" and "Delirious" just to get warmed up before we left the house for important bilateral meetings like this.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

NEWTON: Isn't that great? I can certainly picture them doing it. Now Prince was not just a pioneer when it came to music. He was also a pioneer

in the modern recording industry. He famously adopted an unpronounceable symbol as his name to escape a recording contract with Warner Brothers.

Prince's album "Planet Earth" was given away for free in the UK with a Sunday newspaper in 2007. He also limited the use of the music on

streaming services signing a deal with Jay-z's Tidal instead of rivals like Spotify and Apple Music. Ben Margolin is the founder of Prince.com. I

want to thank you -- pardon me, it's Prince.org. I want to thank you for joining us. First off, is your website back up and running? We tried to

get on it yesterday and it collapsed. When's been going on with you and the website since you've heard the news?

BEN MARGOLIN, FOUNDER, PRINCE.ORG: Yes, it's been really a roller coaster. The site definitely could not handle the traffic yesterday and it is just

barely staying above water today. It will probably not be up right now, so I do apologize for that. You know, we're used to the usual steady stream

of Prince fans coming and visiting and checking out all the latest information, but not obviously something of this magnitude which is so

terrible. It's been insane.

NEWTON: Yes, I'm sure it's been a shock for many people. In terms of what we were just discussing, I mean of course, we're all talking about Prince's

brilliance, especially in the recording studio during those performances, but also, his vision in the business world. Now, first thing to talk to

you about is the way he controlled his name and his music. Why was he such a pioneer in doing that?

MARGOLIN: You know, I think he was -- as you say it, that's absolutely correct. He was very controlling of his image, his intellectual property.

I think he realized early on that was being the artist he was and so creative in so many different ways that having that control was actually

critical for him to project exactly the art and the way he wanted it. And so, I think, upon realizing that he understood that he wanted to be able to

control the way things were marketed, the way things were presented. And so it became just a natural thing for him to get control of his masters,

which was not common thing at all within the recording industry. And for the most part isn't today still. And so, he was ahead of the curve and he

paid kind of a price for that in a lot of way. But it was part of him being the controversial figure that he was and also really very visionary

about how he did business and music and everything else.

NEWTON: Yes, it's incredible some of the things we thought were eccentric. Like him changing his name to the artist formerly known as Prince. Or even

meticulously scrubbing the internet of all of those bootlegged videos of him performing or whatever. And believe me he did all of that. We thought

it was eccentricity. But it wasn't. And then, Ben, we have to get to the whole point of the vault. Right? Apparently there are hundreds, perhaps

thousands, of recordings that he's made. I mean, what do you know of that? Do you think they will ever be released?

[16:55:00] MARGOLIN: Well, I certainly don't have any secret insight to it. It's certainly been rumored for as long as Prince has been producing

music. He certainly produces much, much more volume than has ever been released and also an incredibly prolific artist to start with. And so

everyone kind of knows that he records things and then, you know, in the studio and they go somewhere into the depths of Paisley Park. Which is a

massive, you know, complex. You know, I don't know if there's literally a vault. That would be pretty cool. But there is -- it's hard to know how

much is there, but certainly considering that this was a singular prolific creator that was working in the studio essentially almost every day much of

his life. You can imagine that there's a lot of material there. So, certainly, I think a lot of fans would love to see some of that stuff come

out, but of course, you know, I mean, we have more pressing issues and concerns at the moment and certainly one day it would be fantastic to hear

the other glimpses of his output.

NEWTON: Ben, thanks so much for speaking to us and we'll continue obviously, to see if we get more information on his passing. And I know

that you will continue to love his music and it's Prince.org once again. If you can get on it, I suggest going on it. There's lots of stuff there

in the archive that you posted. Appreciate it, Ben.

Now, Adam Smith, the famous philosopher and author of the "Wealth of Nations" is the latest high profile casualty to be called from appearing on

currency. The bank of England's governor kicked the successor and we'll show you who's on it next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:00:00] NEWTON: It's been a big week for changing the face of currency around the world. Now the Bank of England is getting in on the act. The

British artist JMW Turner is replacing Adam Smith on the 20-pound note. Mark Carney, the Bank of England Governor, says he's arguably the single

most influential British artist of all time. Turner, loved for his romantic landscape paintings, was selected ahead of silent era comedian

Charlie Chaplin and sculpture Barbara Hepworth. Turner's famous quote, "Light is therefore color," will feature on the bank note. That's QUEST

MEANS BUSINESS for this Friday. I'm Paula Newton in New York. Have a great weekend. Richard will be back here on Monday.

END